knapplc

So.... how many sockpuppets are you going to create to bolster your flagging ego? The best news you could hear is that some of our players are down with the flu, as has been mentioned in the other thread. Missouri lost to Kansas last year, yet still won the North. That game had far bigger implications than ours, coming so late in the year as it did, yet it wasn't a "huge" loss. I know you Tigers want to be relevant. I know you want to be considered among the elite of the conference. But no matter how many times you say it, this still isn't a huge game.

Bing. As would I.

So... when Missouri fans come on our board and paint our team in an unfavorable light, you suggest we ___________? All I've been doing is responding to claims made by some Missouri homers, and in the case of MissouriBob and Fro, chit-chatting about the game.

Aaron O'Neal was the Mizzou linebacker who died during a practice a few years back, and whose number all the seniors wore last season. His locker is still as he left it that day. Classy. That ONE PERSON is not classy. You're not going to cast aspersions on the whole fan base because one guy wrote something the other 99.99% of us abhor.

I hope they try to censure Cook for disclosing that those two officials are gone. The Coliseum would go absolutely ballistic the rest of the season if they take action on him. If people think that place is noisy now, imagine what it'll be like then. Our fans will still be polite, but they will be felt. 10/24/09 - OU comes to the Coliseum. Bring your ear plugs. =)

He got a boo-boo on his leg. Seriously - you're not going to get injury information out of Bo. Asante's leg could have fallen off and Bo would say he hadn't heard from the medical staff what was wrong with him.

There's an interesting game this week and the people in this forum would rather it turns into Romper Room than discuss football. Brilliant.

Missouri lost to Kansas in 2008 and still won the North.

Maybe Pinkel and Washington are playing possum with the running game. I get that your O Line is young, but they've all got game experience from last season, as I recall. Washington didn't suddenly gain 50lbs, so it's not like he should be slower. All signs point to a good rushing attack for Missouri but... it's not there. And that's against poor rushing defenses, too. Bowling Green is 106th. Illinois is 103rd. Nevada is your toughest opponent against the run at 52nd in the nation. Missouri had to run the ball a lot against these teams to get their yards.

My 5th grade daughter's class has had five cases. There is one kindergarten room at the school that only had 6 students in class yesterday, the rest were out sick. Everyone coming through it OK? I'm not hearing much about any real trouble, just typical flu stuff.

I would definitely expect us to blitz Gabbert. He's made some poor decisions under duress, and we have much better hosses with which to get after him than your other opponents.

I'm not sure of percentages, but I don't recall that we've run DIME much this year. Some against FAU, some against VT, some against ULL. It bears repeating that Nebraska has largely run a base defense without blitzes or even many line stunts so far this year. We blitzed maybe five times each game, ran a few stunts here or there, and put in some different packages here and there, but for the most part we haven't gotten too crazy with our alignments or packages. Really, we haven't needed to against our SunBelt opponents, and our plan against VT was contain, contain, contain. The defense we run against Missouri should be more up-tempo than against any other opponent so far this season, and it remains to be seen how effective it is. Our guys are executing quite a bit better than we were this time last year, that's for certain. Better alignment, better gap coverage, better knowledge of coverage and responsibilities, that's what we've got so far. And with a national ranking in the top 21 in Scoring (1), Pass Efficiency(16) and Total defense(16), I'd say it's working so far.

Doc, pay attention to this post. This whole thing was a mistake.

This thread is goofy from the start, and it should never have been used to call a person out. That's not what it's about, and that's not what I'm about. My beef with your use of stats can best be summed up in the discussion of SOS, where you chose to focus specifically on games won by Nebraska (ignoring VT) while at the same time ignoring Furman for Missouri. This was well discussed between us, and probably resolved. We've discussed so much I don't know what all we've put to rest or not. But whatever. I don't want you to feel bad. You're a homer and you support your team. Coincidentally, so am I. That's how I see it, and I have no animosity toward your comportment here on Huskerboard. What happens at Tiger Board... is best left to a discussion over there. But I'm not registered there, and frankly, I like the atmosphere here much better. This whole thing reeks of being blown way out of proportion and I'm afraid if we keep discussing it, we're going to end up in a group hug. Nobody wants that.

No problem, man. Your intentions were good.

Not defending this guy, but have you seen some of the posts by your own fans on this very site?

OK. I thought I was going insane there for a minute. I completely agree about IV Hokie. I'm seriously relieved we got this cleared up.

You're judging things through a lens of Osborne-Era Huskers. Since Solich was fired we're 39-27, a record most teams wouldn't scoff at. By Husker standards that's horrific, but for most of the college football world, it's about what they're used to. Read it again and comprehend it at least once. Here's a hint. If one were comatosed for 20 years the Osborne era wouldn't be a factor. Okay, now try again. Do we have to go through this again? Do we need another half dozen people to tell you you're missing the point? Again? I read what you said. What you said is wrong, because most college programs would be just fine with a 39-27 record. You're not judging this as would "most programs," you're judging this through the lens of a winning program. From a baseline of zero, ignoring our winning past, looking at this like the vast majority of programs out there, our record is not only fine, but the norm. The ONLY reason it's "bad" is we're used to winning more. And we're used to winning more because of the Osborne Era.

Edited. All cleared up.

Edited. All cleared up.

He's fine. Where did you hear that he was limited? He's been practicing at "100%" since Monday.

Just because it is a big distraction on message boards and for the media does not mean it is a distraction for the team or the defense. True, but the players are being asked about it in press conferences. It's just one more thing. Probably not a big deal, and it's probably a bigger deal to those of us talking about stuff over and over than anything else.

My biggest gripe about it is that it's becoming way more of a distraction. I understand that Bo wants the Blackshirts to be a loftily-held goal, but every year we're faced with these same questions. I wonder if the benefit of doing it this way is overshadowed by the anticipation of when they'll be handed out.

You're judging things through a lens of Osborne-Era Huskers. Since Solich was fired we're 39-27, a record most teams wouldn't scoff at. By Husker standards that's horrific, but for most of the college football world, it's about what they're used to.

Except we have indoor plumbing, cities and teeth. And fireworks. Not that I've ever traveled to Rock Port and purchased them. That would be illegal. But that's what I heard.